“Currently, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 million legal and illegal immigrants every year, with more than 70 percent coming to the country through the process known as “chain migration” whereby newly naturalized citizens can bring an UNLIMITED relatives to the U.S. In the next 20 years, the current U.S. legal immigration system is on track to import 15 million new foreign-born voters. Between 7 and 8 million of those foreign-born will arrive in the U.S. through chain migration.” JOHN BINDER

Sunday, May 8, 2016

Former President Fox of NARCOMEX Endorses LA RAZA SUPREMACIST Hillaria Clinton - He demands millions more jobs for Mexicans, billlions more in welfare and an open market for the Mexican drug cartels now operating all over America

“I’m not
going to pay for that f------ wall,” Fox said in an interview with Univision's
"Al Punto" set to air Sunday, in...

The former president of Mexico
Vicente Fox has a blunt rebuttal to Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s
plans to build an enormous wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

“I’m not going to pay for that
f------ wall,” Fox said in an interview with Univision's "Al
Punto" set to air Sunday, in...

(Matt
Pearce and Alexandra Zavis)

LA RAZA SUPREMACIST HILLARIA CLINTON
HAS TAKE BIG BRIBESFROM THE MEXICANS, STARTING WITH A $500,000 BRIBE FROM THE
RICHEST MAN IN THE WORLD, MEXICAN CARLOS SLIM, AS WELL AS MORE BRIBES SHE
HUSTLED HERSELF DOWN IN MEXICO.

THE LA RAZA CANDIDATE HAS PROMISED
INVADING MEXICANS MILLIONS MORE JOBS AND BILLIONS MORE IN WELFRE IF THEY VOTE
HILLARIA!

MEANWHILE, LIKE ANY MEXICAN, FOX
CONTINUES TO INSULT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WITH HIS ASSERTIONS WE ARE SO WEAK AND
FRAGILE WE CAN’T OPERATE WITHOUT THE MEXICANS AND THEIR FUCKING LEAF BLOWERS!

“President Fox, a rancher and former Coca-Cola executive who
served as Mexico’s leader from 2000 to 2006, has long identified with the
Republican Party. But in this election, he supports the candidacy of a
Democrat: Hillary Clinton.”

“Look at the back, hidden here,” he says, pointing to the
manufacturer’s label. “‘Made in China.’ So he’s really protecting
workers in the United States, protecting jobs in the United States.”

Fox, a rancher and former Coca-Cola executive who served as
Mexico’s leader from 2000 to 2006, has long identified with the Republican
Party. But in this election, he supports the candidacy of a Democrat: Hillary Clinton.

“What choice do I have?” he told the Los Angeles Times this
week.

Like many Mexicans, he sees in Trump’s aggressive rhetoric
an alarming xenophobia that could prove disastrous to relations between the
countries and harm both their economies. He and other prominent Mexican
figures, including former President Felipe Calderon, have been making a concerted
effort in recent weeks to promote the benefits of migration and free trade.Former Mexican president Vicente
Fox

Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times

Former Mexican president Vicente FIn an interview with The Times, Fox took issue with Trump’s
often-repeated assertion that the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement is a bad
deal, offered up alternatives to deporting an estimated 11 million migrants in
the U.S. illegally and said he hoped that California would legalize the
recreational use of marijuana, a proposal that appears headed for the
Nov. 8 ballot.

Here are excerpts from the conversation. They have been
edited for clarity.

BLOG: PUT EMPLOYERS OF ILLEGALS IN PRISON.
IMPOSE E-VERIFY, END MEXICO’S ANCHOR BABY BREEDING FOR 18 YEARS OF GRINGO-PAID
WELFARE THAT WILL SEND THE LOOTERS PACKING!

The problem with building walls

You cannot enclose the United States between four walls. You
cannot isolate yourself from the rest of the world. And you cannot get away
from the responsibility that this nation has to the world. Those who cede
leadership leave empty spaces that somebody else is going to fill. And in this
case it’s China.

On supporting Hillary Clinton

What choice do I have? I’ll tell you why. What I have
learned in life, what I have learned in business, what I have learned in
politics, is that you need leaders that have two attributes. One is compassion.
No 2, yes, you need a firm hand—but without a stick, without an atomic bomb.

You need to be in this case an Iron Lady, and that I think
is one attribute that Hillary has. And the other one? Having this image of a
loving and tender mother that cares about citizens. Not only their jobs. Jobs
don’t mean happiness. Happiness is education. Happiness is good values.
Happiness is spirituality. I know that she is not the perfect lady, but she is
willing to build up a team.

Let’s just take marijuana. California produces much more marijuana
than Mexico, and much better marijuana in quality than Mexico. What’s the
problem? The problem is we are in between the mammoth U.S. markets and the
producers of drugs in the south, the Colombias, the Venezuelas, the Ecuadors
and the Bolivias. We are trapped.

What’s the solution? The solution is here. It’s in the
United States. Why should we go to a war when that can be done right here in
San Diego, right here in Arizona? That market is worth $55 billion. Who gets
the money? The cartels. What do they do with it? Hire kids in Mexico, pay them
three times minimum wage, when industry is paying two times minimum wage. Now
who gets them the weapons? The guns are bought here with that $55 billion.

Then we get “El Chapo” escaped from prison. [They say]
“Mexicans, they don’t know how to run a prison.” When Chapo comes with $1
million to the guy that is taking care of him. He comes with maybe $5 million
to the CEO of the jail. And maybe he comes with $5 million to the governor and
to the criminal authorities. It’s very difficult to combat the power of those
cartels and their financial capacity.

BLOG: THE MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS NOW OPERATE IN ALL AMERICAN
CITIES AND HAUL BACK FROM $40 TO $60 BILLION. ENOUGH TO BUY THE ENTIRE COUNTRY
OF MEXICO AND DOZEN TIMES!

The argument for legalizing drugs –
yes, even cocaine

Legalizing is one way out. Fortunately, the United States is
moving [in that direction]. I’m just waiting for California to take the step
that Washington state, that Colorado did.

President Nixon launched the war against drugs 50 years ago.
And what happened? More drug consumption, more violations of human rights, more
killings, more violence.

That is why I think we must move from prohibition into
regulation, like we did with cigarettes. In Mexico, it’s working wonderfully. I
mean the decrease in use of cigarettes is incredible, because on the packet it
says, look, you are going to have cancer.

We should do that with drugs. We human beings respond to
logic, to information, to convincing, not the stick.

What to do about immigrants in the
U.S. illegally

If [Trump] throws out 11 million, first it is almost
impossible to do. But No. 2, the quality of life in the United States will go.
Who is going to cook? Who is going to nurse? Who is going to garden? Who is
going to clean the streets?

The solution is sitting there in Congress. I wish Trump, and
if not, I wish Hillary will read that bill.

Solution No 1: Those who are undocumented are going to get a
temporary permit to work and to be in the United States as long as the guy who
is hiring them keeps contracting them.

And No. 2: Anybody who does not have a clean record, anybody
that has a criminal background, out. Send them to Mexico, send them to Cuba,
send them to Guantanamo, whatever. We are willing to accept that. That solves
the problem of the undocumented.

Why the North Atlantic Free Trade
Agreement is a good deal

NAFTA has been a total success.
It has brought back competitiveness to the U.S. economy that was totally lost.
Ford Motor Co., Chrysler, General Motors could not compete with Volkswagen,
with Mazda, with Toyota, with BMW, with Mercedes, and were broke because they
were paying [workers] $80 an hour. Solution: NAFTA. Solution: Mexico and
Canada.

Now not only U.S. cars, all cars of the world are being
manufactured yes, in Canada, yes, in Mexico. That’s why today GM, Ford,
Chrysler not only survived bankruptcy, but today they successfully compete with
the other automobile companies.

So why should we eliminate NAFTA, which by the way, this guy
cannot eliminate if it is not with Congress’ approval.

What we see here is economic ignorance. Imagine if he
imposes 40% taxation on cars coming from Mexico, from Canada and from
elsewhere. U.S. consumers are going to pay for that. So when you buy your Vochito,
your Volkswagen, instead of $20,000, now you will have to pay $28,000.

President Hoover went the same route, and what happened?
Depression, the largest, profoundest ever.

Why illegal immigration may not be
the problem everyone thinks it is

Today, the train has reversed. More Mexicans are going back
than Mexicans coming in. The wall, and the menaces and the xenophobes, has them
saying, “Well if I can get my job in Mexico, I stay in Mexico.” And the other
thing is that they now have a job in Mexico.

The whole Bajio area , the state of Querétaro, Guanajuato,
Aguascalientes, San Luis Potosí, we have full employment there. My family
farms, we don’t get the people we need. General Motors has a plant there, they
don’t get the people that they need.

So instead of putting that money on the wall, that will be
enough to create businesses, to create jobs among us too — to the benefit
of both.

Why Fox doesn’t think Trump will
change if he becomes president

In Latin America, we have a lot of experience on this. We
were in the hands of dictators, messianic leaders, and we paid a huge price.
The Perons, the Evitas, the Hugo Chavezes, the Evo Moraleses have destroyed,
absolutely destroyed, those economies. Of course when they were campaigning,
people said the same: “Nah, don’t worry, they won’t do it.”

"In the meantime, the porous southern border has created a huge national security risk, and the region is a cesspool of violent criminal activity perpetuated by heavily armed Mexican drug cartels that have joined forces with Islamic terrorists to enter the U.S."

Last week we reported that Mexican drug traffickers help Islamic terrorists stationed in Mexico cross into the United States to explore targets for future attacks. Among the jihadists who travel back and forth through the porous southern border is a Kuwaiti named Shaykh Mahmood Omar Khabir, an ISIS operative who lives in the Mexican state of Chihuahua not far from El Paso, Texas.

Even as this is happening, the Obama administration is creating in its own version of Alice in Wonderland. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports this week on an astonishing descent into the rabbit hole – funded by your tax dollars:

Mass immigration from Mexico has ended, an escalation of border enforcement has backfired, and the greatest need now is a path to legal status for the 11 million illegal immigrants who are already in the United States, according to a new study funded by the governments of both countries. The findings could lead some to wonder what the taxpayer-funded researchers were smoking when they compiled this one.

It’s no joke, though. Not only has mass immigration from Mexico ended, it won’t be coming back, according to the college professor in charge of this affair. His name is Douglas S. Massey. He’s an Ivy League sociology and public affairs teacher who co-directs the Mexican Migration Project (MMP), which is partially funded by Uncle Sam through the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). With a headquarters in Guadalajara, Mexico MMP strives to further understand the complex process of Mexican migration to the United States. Massey attributes what he has determined to be the end of mass immigration from Mexico to the “decline of Mexican fertility from 6.5 children per woman in the 1960s to around 2.2 children today.” It’s time to shift from a policy of immigration suppression to one of immigration management, according to Massey and his fellow academics.

Their recent study is titled “Why Border Enforcement Backfired,” a collaborative effort between American researchers and their Mexican counterparts at the Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas, a publicly-funded education center specializing in social science. Besides the government cash that regularly flows to the MMP, the study itself got an infusion of taxpayer dollars from the NICHD, which operates under the National Institutes of Health (NIH). NICHD has a monstrous budget ($1.3 billion in 2015), and distributes quite a bit of money to causes that seem to follow leftist protocol.In this instance the research found that “border militarization” has actually resulted in higher numbers of illegal immigrants coming to the U.S. from Mexico. That’s because border enforcement has “affected the behavior of unauthorized migrants and border outcomes to transform undocumented Mexican migration from a circular flow of male workers going to three states into an 11 million person population of settled families living in 50 states,” this esteemed group of academics claim. They argue that border enforcement emerged in response to “moral panic” about the perceived threat of Latino immigration to this country. “The end result was a self-perpetuating cycle of rising enforcement and increased apprehensions that resulted in the militarization of the border in a way that was disconnected from the actual size of the undocumented flow,” the researchers found.

It gets better.

In a promotional announcement released by his university, Massey, the lead researcher, says this: “Rather than stopping undocumented Mexicans from coming to the U.S., greater enforcement stopped them from going home.” Here is his attempt to explain that absurd theory: “Greater enforcement raised the costs of undocumented border crossing, which required undocumented migrants to stay longer in the U.S. to make a trip profitable. Greater enforcement also increased the risk of death and injury during border crossing. As the costs and risks rose, migrants naturally minimized border crossing — not by remaining in Mexico but by staying in the United States.”

Are we supposed to take this guy seriously?

In the meantime, the porous southern border has created a huge national security risk, and the region is a cesspool of violent criminal activity perpetuated by heavily armed Mexican drug cartels that have joined forces with Islamic terrorists to enter the U.S.

We have reported on this for years and in fact, back in 2011 cited a Texas Department of Agriculture report confirming that Mexican drug cartels have transformed parts of the state into a war zone where shootings, beheadings, kidnappings and murders are common. More recently JW published an investigative series about Islamic terrorists operating camps in Mexico, just a few miles from the U.S. border and slipping into the country with the help of narco-traffickers.

HILLARY CLINTON SAYS MILLIONS MORE VOTING ILLEGAL SHOULD BE HANDED OBAMACARE!CLINTON'S PLATFORM IS SIMPLE: BUILD THE MEX WELFARE STATE ON AMERICA'S BACK TO BUY THEIR ILLEGAL VOTES.THEY ALREADY GET MILLIONS OF OUR JOBS AND BILLIONS IN WELFARE!THE AMERICAN THINKER

NO ONE SERVES HIS PAYMASTERS ON WALL STREET MORE THAN BARACK OBAMA!

HE SMELLS THOSE SPEECH FEE BRIBES ALREADY!

AND HILLARY IS OBAMA'S CLONE!

Drug prices have also been a theme in the presidential campaign. The Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, for example, released a campaign advertisement earlier this month attacking the “predatory pricing” of Valeant Pharmaceuticals. Like the congressional hearing, this is all for show. Of all the presidential candidates, Clinton is the top recipient of donations from the pharmaceutical and health products industry, taking in $410,460 according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

Drug prices have also been a theme in the presidential campaign. The Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, for example, released a campaign advertisement earlier this month attacking the “predatory pricing” of Valeant Pharmaceuticals. Like the congressional hearing, this is all for show. Of all the presidential candidates, Clinton is the top recipient of donations from the pharmaceutical and health products industry, taking in $410,460 according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

Clinton’s rival, Bernie Sanders, who has stated that he will support Clinton if he loses the Democratic nomination, received $82,094 in donations from the industry. Sanders has proposed a series of minor reforms to address drug prices, such as the re-importation of drugs from Canada, allowing Medicare to negotiate prices with drug manufacturers, and decreasing the patent life of branded drugs.
None of the candidates, including the “democratic socialist” Sanders, challenge the private ownership of the pharmaceutical industry in which everything from research and development and clinical testing to drug pricing and promotion are subordinated to the profit interests of corporations.

THE PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION HAS SUCKED IN MORE THAN $500,000 IN BRIBES FROM THE RICHEST MAN IN THE WORLD, MEXICAN CARLOS SLIM. WHAT WAS HE BUYING? OBAMA AMNESTY FOR 40 MILLION LOOTING MEXICANS!

Do a search for THE CLINTONS AND THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA "The Race"Clinton has also held several fundraisers in Mexico. One of the co-hosts of a February fundraising dinner was Wal-Mart lobbyist Ivan Zapien, who relocated to Mexico with the company in 2015. Clinton served on the board of Wal-Mart from 1986-1992.

Clinton rakes in cash overseas

Greg Nash

By Jonathan Swan - 03/20/16 10:30 AM EDT

Hillary Clinton's campaign has held more fundraisers on foreign soil than any other candidate running for president in 2016.

The Clinton campaign has held at least 13 fundraisers overseas so far, involving celebrities such as jazz singer Tony Bennett and fashion editor Anna Wintour, according to tracking of political fundraising invitations by the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation.

Clinton’s offshore fundraisers, which tap wealthy U.S. citizens and permanent resident living abroad, have spanned from London, where the campaign has held at least eight fundraisers, to Munich, Mexico City, and Durban, South Africa. None of the Clinton campaign's foreign events, so far as the invitations suggest, have featured the candidate herself, though surrogates including her daughter Chelsea, have hosted the high-priced gatherings.
No other candidate running for president this cycle has done anything remotely approaching the amount of overseas fundraising as Clinton's campaign has done to date.
The former secretary of State has dwarfed her rivals in expatriate cash, raised at least $495,000 so far from Americans living abroad, according to The Hill's analysis of federal election records.
Clinton's rival in the Democratic primary race, Bernie Sanders, has raised less than a quarter of that, and the three Republicans still in the race have raised relatively miniscule amounts from Americans abroad.Ted Cruz has raised just $23,000 overseas; Donald Trump — who has a “donate” button on his website but doesn’t hold fundraisers — took in $1100; and John Kasich has raised only $50 from overseas donors, according to figures disclosed in the most recent reporting period.
Even Jeb Bush, who has a wide political network overseas through his family’s connections, only raised slightly more than $200,000 from Americans living abroad.
No foreign fundraising invitations could be found by the Sunlight Foundation for any other candidate besides Clinton. One of the rare examples of a foreign fundraiser for a 2016 presidential candidate found on the public record is former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who went to Israel last year in part to raise money for his campaign.
While overseas fundraisers are hardly a new practice for well-known establishment candidates; the Clinton campaign is on pace to exceed even what the sitting President Barack Obama managed in 2012, assuming she becomes the Democratic nominee.
Throughout the two years of the 2012 presidential cycle, President Obama's campaign held at least 13 fundraising events on foreign soil in countries as far-reaching as China and Egypt, according to the Sunlight Foundation. Republican nominee Mitt Romney's campaign held at least four fundraisers in London and Jerusalem.
Long-time Democratic fundraiser Kenneth Christensen, whose D.C.-based consulting firm Christensen & Associates helps candidates set up their finance operations, says he's not surprised that the Clinton campaign has established a more powerful offshore finance machine than any other candidate.
"Obviously with the Clintons they have a lot of experience in doing that. They give lots of speeches overseas, and they run into a lot of people," Christensen told The Hill in a telephone interview Friday. "A lot of that fundraising overseas are relationships they already have."

Christensen, who is focusing on Democratic congressional races this cycle, indicated it would be professionally negligent not to take full advantage of Clinton's relationships to finance what is becoming an expensive primary race against a well-funded Bernie Sanders campaign. The Clinton advantages include her global connections as a former secretary of State, her family's foundation, and above all, the unparalleled donor network established by both Bill and Hillary Clinton over several decades.

Clinton's offshore fundraisers so far this cycle have included a post-concert reception at London's Royal Albert Hall with Tony Bennett, a "discussion" between Chelsea Clinton and Anna Wintour, and a Munich Fashion Week event with former ambassador Melanne V

Clinton has also held several fundraisers in Mexico. One of the co-hosts of a February fundraising dinner was Wal-Mart lobbyist Ivan Zapien, who relocated to Mexico with the company in 2015. Clinton served on the board of Wal-Mart from 1986-1992.
The Federal Election Commission, which regulates campaign fundraising, stipulates that "foreign nationals are prohibited from making any contributions or expenditures in connection with any election in the U.S." But the FEC allows that both U.S. citizens and "green card" holders living abroad (individuals lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the U.S.) "are not considered foreign nationals and, as a result, may contribute."
"I would expect a professional campaign to take advantage of all their fundraising opportunities," Christensen said. "She's capitalizing on it now to make sure she's running an aggressive and professional fundraising operation."

"Criminal aliens released by ICE between 2010 and 2015 have been charged with 124 new homicides and thousands of other crimes that harm citizens and degrade the quality of life in American communities."

In an interview with KTAR radio in Phoenix, Mrs. Clinton said improvements under President George W. Bush and President Obama, including several hundred miles of fencing, have cut net illegal immigration from Mexico to zero.

“Now I think it’s time to turn our attention to comprehensive immigration reform,” she said, using the term immigrant rights advocates use for legislation to legalize the 11 million illegal immigrants now in the country.

Her evaluation of the border stands in stark contrast to Republican presidential candidates who say the border is not secure, pointing to increasing seizures of drugs and to the renewed surge of Central American illegal immigrants.

But Mrs. Clinton said they’re ignoring how bad it used to be during her husband’s administration.

“I think we’ve done a really good job securing the border and I think those that say we haven’t are not paying attention to everything that was done for the last 15 years under both President Bush and President Obama,” she told KTAR. “We have increased dramatically the number of border security officers, we have added physical obstructions like fences in many places, and in fact the immigration from Mexico has dropped considerably. It’s just not happening any more.”

Looking over the last 20 years of illegal immigration from Mexico, Clinton may have a point. Apprehensions at the border are way up and net immigration from Mexico has fallen.

But that's hardly the entire picture:

But the number of Central Americans attempting the illegal crossing has surged over the last three years, leading some experts to say the border problems have shifted, not gone away.

Border Patrol agents say the new illegal immigrants are drawn by the chance to take advantage of lax enforcement of immigration laws within the U.S., which gives them the opportunity to disappear into the shadows with the 11 million other illegal immigrants already here.

Mrs. Clinton, who will face voters in the Democratic primary in Arizona next week, has come under fire from some Hispanic activists for having voted as a senator for the Secure Fence Act, which called for building 700 miles of double-tier fencing along the southwest border.

The first line of defense of our borders has a much different view of the matter. Border agents are supporting Donald Trump for his strong stand against illegal immigration:

The largest U.S. Border Patrol union local is praising Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump for being the "only candidate" to support their tough mission, an almost endorsement that is the latest boost for the front runner's campaign.

"Mr. Trump is the only candidate that has publicly expressed his support of our mission and our agents. He has been an outspoken candidate on the need for a Secure Border and for this we are grateful," said a statement from Art Del Cueto, president of Local 2544 of the National Border Patrol Council, the representative of 18,000 agents.

Perhaps before the next time Hillary Clinton makes a fool of herself spouting immigration nonsense, she should consult the people who know the situation best; those charged with defending our borders from illegal aliens.

March 22, 2016

DHS says administration has 'no

intention' of deporting most illegals

The president of the National Border Control Council testified before Congress that a top Homeland Security official told agents that the Obama administration has "no intention of deporting" most illegal aliens.This "catch and release" policy amounts to a de facto amnesty for the tens of thousands of illegals who jump the border every year.

DHS claims that the policy is in place because immigration courts are clogged up. So instead of expanding the number of judges and courts, they simply give up and allow the illegals to disappear into the underground.

Mr. Judd provided his testimony in written answers released Monday by the House Judiciary Committee, saying that even in some criminal cases, agents are ordered to let illegal immigrants go without ever issuing them a Notice to Appear, or NTA, which is what puts them into deportation proceedings.

Mr. Judd said they took their case directly to Deputy Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who told them not to bother.

“Deputy Secretary Mayorkas told us that the Border Patrol needs to focus its resources towards the worst of the worst. He said that by prioritizing those we choose to deport, we will help alleviate the burden on an already overburdened court system,” Mr. Judd recalled.

“He further stated, ‘Why would we NTA those we have no intention of deporting?’ He also stated, ‘We should not place someone in deportation proceedings, when the courts already have a 3-6 year backlog,’” Mr. Juddrecounted. “Since the day of this meeting, we have seen no improvements in our enforcement efforts and the morale of the Border Patrol agents is one of, if not the lowest in the entire federal government.”

Immigration agents have complained for several years that Mr. Obama has tied their hands, forcing them to release illegal immigrants who should have been easy deportation cases.

Customs and Border Protection, the agency that oversees the Border Patrol, declined to comment on Mr. Judd’s testimony.

But CBP Commissioner R. Gil Kerlikowske, testifying to Congress earlier this month, brushed aside Mr. Judd’s comments, saying he didn’t believe agents were releasing people without putting them through the full process.

Mr. Kerlikowske said Mr. Judd was “probably not the most knowledgeable organization about what’s actually going on” in the field with Border Patrol agents, and he said agents that object to Mr. Obama’s policies should quit.

How Donald Trump scored a win in Texas border country

Patti Magnon grew up on the other side of the Rio Grande — in the adjacent Mexican city known as Nuevo Laredo.

But the border here has never been a barrier, and Magnon, who has lived on the U.S. side now for years, feels at home in both. “Proud to be an American & a Catholic!” proclaims her bio on Twitter. “Love my Mexican heritage! An immigrant is not the same as an illegal immigrant.”

This has coincided with the political subordination of workers to the Democratic Party, which under the Obama administration has spearheaded the attack on workers’ jobs and wages and the historic transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top.

New study says entire regions of US will remain in slump until the 2020s

By Jerry White

21 March 2016

A new study by a University of California-Berkeley economist says
that at current sluggish levels of job growth, entire regions of the
United States, which were hit hardest by the Great Recession will not
return to “normal” employment levels until the 2020s. This amounts, to
“more than a ‘lost decade’ of depressed employment” for “half of the
country,” wrote economist Danny Yagan.

The new study is one of many showing that the fall of the official
unemployment rate, touted by the Obama administration and the news media
as proof of a robust economic recovery, if not a return to “full
employment,” is largely based on the fact that millions of workers fell
out of the labor force in the years preceding and following the 2008
financial crash.

The labor-force participation rate fell to a 38-year low of 62.4
percent last fall, and only climbed up to 62.9 percent in February.
According to the Economic Policy Institute, February’s official jobless
rate of 4.9 percent—the lowest since the pre-recession level of 4.7
percent in November 2007—would really be 6.3 percent if the country’s
“missing workers” were included. These include 2.4 million workers who
have given up actively looking for work.

Yagan based his findings on a detailed study of some 2 million,
similarly paid workers in the retail industry in order to calculate
employment patterns across different local areas and to account for
occupations that might have been particularly hard hit in one region.

He found that the areas hardest hit by the recession, which began in
December 2007 and officially ended in June 2009, continued to have high
levels of joblessness in 2014. His map of these distressed areas
includes all of Florida and parts of Arizona, Nevada, California,
Colorado, New Mexico, the Dakotas, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Georgia,
Connecticut, New Hampshire and other states.

While different areas of the country are often hit differently by an economic downturn, an article in the Wall Street Journal
on Yagan’s study noted, these economically distressed areas generally
return to normal levels of employment chiefly because workers move to
find work in areas with a higher demand for labor. In the case of the
“Great Recession,” however, the mass layoffs resulted in “muted
migration,” according to other studies cited by the Journal, and workers simply fell out of the labor market.

“Unlike the aftermath of the 1980s and 1990s recessions,” Yagan
wrote, “employment in hard-hit areas remains very depressed relative to
the rest of the country.” Living in areas like Phoenix, Arizona, or Las
Vegas, Nevada means confronting “enduring joblessness and exacerbated
inequality,” Yagan wrote. “If the latest convergence speed continues,
employment differences across the United States are estimated to return
to normal in the 2020s—more than a decade after the Great Recession.”

The lack of decent job opportunities in large swathes of the country
has created a reserve army of unemployed and underemployed workers who
are competing for a shrinking number of jobs in areas that are more or
less permanently distressed. Last month’s Labor Department employment
report noted that the average annual unemployment rate in 36 states,
plus Washington, D.C. was higher in 2015 than the average unemployment
rate for those states in 2007.

The majority of unemployed people in the US do not receive
unemployment insurance benefits, according to the National Employment
Law Project, with just over one in four jobless workers (27 percent), a
record low, receiving such benefits in 2015.

The details of these studies will come as no surprise for tens of
millions of workers across the United States who face unprecedented
levels of economic insecurity, ongoing mass layoffs, and more than a
decade of stagnating or falling real wages. This has fueled the growth
of enormous discontent and the initial stirrings of class struggle by
American workers, which the trade unions and both big business parties
have sought to channel in the direction of economic nationalism and
hostility to workers in China, Mexico and other countries.

In fact, US workers are being subjected to the same attacks as
workers around the world. The reports on the employment situation in the
US coincide with a continual massacre of jobs in the world’s steel, oil
and mining industries, with 1.2 million steel and coal mining jobs
targeted for destruction in China alone.

Continual layoffs in the US have been driven by the plunging price of
steel, petroleum, coal and other commodities, which has been generated
in large measure by the fall in demand from China and other so-called
emerging economies. Last week, St. Louis, Missouri-based Peabody Energy,
the largest coal mining company in the world, announced it could soon
file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, after its share values fell 46 percent
over the last six months.

Peabody has already cut 20 percent of its global workforce since
2012, while spinning off large sections of its operations in order to
cheat retirees out of their pensions. The company’s announcement follows
bankruptcy filings by both Arch Coal and Alpha Natural Resources and a
similar threat from coal mining giant Foresight Energy. In its press
release, Peabody pointed to the collapse in the coal market, where the
price per ton has fallen to $40 from $200 in 2008.

The steel industry continues to wipe out jobs, with 12,000
steelworkers already laid off or facing imminent job cuts. The largest
US steelmaker, US Steel, has slashed thousands of jobs in Texas,
Illinois, Ohio, Indiana and Pennsylvania. The aluminum giant Alcoa is
just weeks away from closing its smelter in Warrick County, Indiana,
wiping out another 600 jobs. Meanwhile, the United Steelworkers (USW)
union is pushing for protectionist measures against China, Brazil,
Russia and other countries, even as it pushes through concession-laden
contracts at US Steel, Allegheny Technologies and now ArcelorMittal.

Early last year, the USW betrayed the strike by thousands of oil
refinery workers, blocking any struggle against the brutal restructuring
of the industry that is now underway. The plunging of oil prices
triggered more than 258,000 layoffs in the global energy industry in
2015—with the number of active oil and gas rigs in the US falling 61
percent. Analysts anticipate a new round of job cuts and bankruptcies in
early 2016.

Texas has lost 60,000 energy-related jobs alone, or one-fifth of the
workforce in that sector in the state, with North Dakota and
Pennsylvania also being hard hit. The current US unemployment rate for
the oil, gas and mining sector is 8.5 percent, but could top 10 percent
by February, double the national jobless rate.

Last month, the air conditioner maker Carrier announced it was
eliminating 1,400 jobs at its Indianapolis plant and a nearby facility,
and shipping production to Monterrey, Mexico where wages are
approximately $6 an hour. A video shot by a worker, capturing the
explosive anger at a meeting of plant workers when a manager makes the
announcement, has been viewed millions of times.

Far from organizing any resistance to the closure of the factory and
destruction of jobs, however, the USW is collaborating with United
Technologies Carrier management to carry out an orderly shutdown and the
retraining of displaced workers for lower-paying jobs.

The USW is hostile to any fight to unite American workers with their
brothers and sisters in Mexico, who have been engaging in growing
resistance to the exploitation by the transnational corporations. USW
officials are telling workers to rely on the Democratic Party to
implement protectionist trade measures to “save jobs” and “take our
country back.” Local and regional union officials have had nothing but
kind words about Donald Trump’s efforts to swindle workers with economic
nationalist appeals.

The unions have long used economic nationalism to undermine the
class-consciousness of workers and to promote the corporatist outlook of
“labor-management partnership.” In the name of making the corporations
“competitive,” the USW and other unions have suppressed every struggle
against plant closings, job cuts and the destruction of wages and
benefits.

This has coincided with the political subordination of workers to theDemocratic Party, which under the Obama administration has spearheaded the attack on workers’ jobs and wages and the historic transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top.

USW Local 1999, which claims to represent Carrier workers, is urging
them to support Democrat John Gregg for Indiana governor. A former land
agent for Peabody Coal and lobbyist for Amax Coal Company, Gregg served
as the honorary chair of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign in Indiana, and
was a proponent of austerity and corporate tax cuts while Speaker of
the state Legislature.

........................... Will Mexico elect America's next President? Didn't LA RAZA FASCIST PARTY, which is funded by Barack Obama and operates out of the Obama white house under Cecilia Munoz, reelect Obama???

In Aftermath of Brussels Attacks, Conservatives Call for Border Security

U.S. Border Patrol agents search a person suspected of crossing the Rio Grande River to enter the United States illegally near McAllen, Texas, earlier this month. The nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico is the most frequently crossed international border in the world.

(Photo: Larry W. Smith/EPA/Newscom)

In the aftermath of Tuesday’s terror attacks in Brussels that left at least 30 dead, conservatives in Congress say that addressing border security is the key to ensuring terrorists don’t end up in the United States.

In response to a question about how the country can improve its intelligence capabilities, lawmakers attending the monthly event Conversations with Conservatives pointed to securing the border as a way to stop terrorists from striking or entering the United States.

“We’ve been saying over and over this isn’t about dealing with Mexico. This is dealing with national security,” Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., told reporters Tuesday. “This dialogue about immigration and all the people that are coming across the border, it doesn’t do justice to the fact that it is a serious security breach, and if we’re going to take seriously dealing with ISIS and other terrorist groups across the globe, then we have to secure the border.”

Rep. Dave Brat, R-Va., criticized Immigration and Customs Enforcement, specifically, for failing to enforce the laws on the books, particularly when it comes to illegal immigrants who appear in court, are released, and don’t show up again.

“If we would follow the law for starters, that would go a long way toward solving a lot of the problems,” Brat said.

Following the deadly bombings in Brussels, Reps. Dave Brat, R-Va., and Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., said the first priority in addressing security risks in the U.S. needs to be border security. (Photo: Jeff Malet for The Daily Signal)

While Brat and Salmon voiced concern over the security of the nation’s southern border, Rep. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., told reporters that the country needs to focus on collecting intelligence on the ground in order to prevent terror attacks from occurring on U.S. soil.

“With regard to ISIS, I think around the world we do need to embed more into the communities that are hotbeds or breeding grounds of these radicals and try to nip it in the bud as early as possible,” she said. “I think on the ground, intelligence that’s gathered nationwide is going to have to be an ongoing source of information, and it’s not going to be inexpensive, and it’s not going to happen overnight.”Fears surrounding U.S. security risks mounted further Tuesday after deadly bombings occurred in Brussels, killing at least 30 people and injuring more than 200. The terror attacks took place at the city’s international airport and a subway station, and ISIS later claimed responsibility for the attacks.The bombings in Brussels came four days after Belgian authorities captured Salah Abdeslam, a suspect in November’s terror attacks, in the capital city. Abdeslam was one of 10 men police believe were directly involved in terror attacks carried out by ISIS in Paris late last year, which left 130 dead.The terror attacks in Paris sparked a debate among lawmakers about how the U.S. should address Syrian refugees entering the country, as well as whether Congress should alter the visa waiver program.

The House of Representatives passed a bill in November toughening the screenings of Syrians looking to come to the U.S. through the refugee program. The legislation failed in the Senate.

The Republican-controlled Congress, though, ultimately passed a measure through an omnibus spending bill, signed into law by President Barack Obama, that tightened the program’s requirements and required anyone who visited Iran, Iraq, Sudan or Syria after March 1, 2011, to apply for a visa.
Following Tuesday’s terror attacks in Brussels, GOP lawmakers once again called into question the process by which people come to the U.S.

Sens. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., Tim Scott, R-S.C., and David Vitter, R-La., separately called on their colleagues and the Obama administration to reexamine both the refugee program and visa system.Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., meanwhile, said it’s inevitable that terrorists will try to enter the country through the refugee program.

“You have to take ISIS at their word,” Huelskamp told The Daily Signal. “They are going to infiltrate [the refugee program], and if we had anybody else as president, even some Democrats have said we need to take a time out to understand what’s going on here. They have made it very clear they’re going to misuse our immigrant refugee system in order to infiltrate.”

The Kansas Republican, though, said it’s unlikely the president would sign legislation halting the program or lessening the number of Syrian refugees coming into the U.S. this year.

“It’s hard to imagine a situation where he would actually want to do something,” Huelskamp said.

Border Surge Solution: Send ‘Em to Camp David!By Michelle Malkin

Human Events Online, February 17, 2016
. . .
As Brandon Judd of the National Border Patrol Council testified on Capitol Hill recently: “The cartels understood that the unaccompanied minors would force the Border Patrol to deploy Agents to these crossing areas in order to take the minors into custody. I want to stress this point because it has been completely overlooked by the press,” he told the House Judiciary Committee. The unaccompanied minors could have walked right up to the port of entry and requested asylum if they were truly escaping political persecution or violence. “Why did the cartels drive them to the middle of the desert and then have them cross over the Rio Grande only to surrender to the first Border Patrol Agent they came across?” Judd challenged.

“The reason is that it completely tied up our manpower and allowed the cartels to smuggle whatever they wanted across our border.”

This is just another maddening example of Obama’s warped priorities at work. Instead of building effective walls and enforcing our borders to prevent the coming illegal immigration waves manufactured by criminal racketeers, this administration rushes to build welcome center magnets that shelter the next generation of Democrat voters.

U.S. Failed Three Times to Deport Illegal Alien Who Murdered WomanJudicial Watch Corruption Chronicles, February 18, 2016
. . .
Here’s what we already know from local media reports in Norwich, the city of about 40,000 residents where the murder occurred; the DHS agency responsible for deporting illegal immigrants, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), failed to remove Jacques at least three times dating back to 2002. As if this weren’t atrocious enough, Jacques spent 17 years in prison for attempted murder before authorities released him—instead of deporting him—in January of 2015, the Norwich Bulletin reports. Six months later the 41-year-old illegal alien convict stabbed 25-year-old Casey Chadwick to death. Police said Chadwick died of sharp forced injuries to the head and neck. Jacques is being held on a $1 million bond.

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case. In the last few years illegal immigrants with lengthy criminal histories have been allowed to remain in the U.S. despite being repeat offenders. Judicial Watch has investigated several of the cases and obtained public records from the government. For instance, back in 2008 JW launched a California public records request with the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department to obtain he arrest and booking information on Edwin Ramos, an illegal alien from El Salvador who murdered three innocent American citizens. Ramos was a member of a renowned violent street gang and had been convicted of two felonies as a juvenile (a gang-related assault on a bus passenger and the attempted robbery of a pregnant woman) yet he was allowed to remain in the country.
. . .http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/02/u-s-failed-3-times-to-deport-illegal-alien-who-murdered-woman/

March 22, 2016

DHS says administration has 'no intention' of deporting most illegals

They're not even trying to hide their lack of enforcement of immigration law.

The president of the National Border Control Council testified before Congress that a top Homeland Security official told agents that the Obama administration has "no intention of deporting" most illegal aliens.This "catch and release" policy amounts to a de facto amnesty for the tens of thousands of illegals who jump the border every year.

DHS claims that the policy is in place because immigration courts are clogged up. So instead of expanding the number of judges and courts, they simply give up and allow the illegals to disappear into the underground.

Mr. Judd provided his testimony in written answers released Monday by the House Judiciary Committee, saying that even in some criminal cases, agents are ordered to let illegal immigrants go without ever issuing them a Notice to Appear, or NTA, which is what puts them into deportation proceedings.

Mr. Judd said they took their case directly to Deputy Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who told them not to bother.

“Deputy Secretary Mayorkas told us that the Border Patrol needs to focus its resources towards the worst of the worst. He said that by prioritizing those we choose to deport, we will help alleviate the burden on an already overburdened court system,” Mr. Judd recalled.

“He further stated, ‘Why would we NTA those we have no intention of deporting?’ He also stated, ‘We should not place someone in deportation proceedings, when the courts already have a 3-6 year backlog,’” Mr. Juddrecounted. “Since the day of this meeting, we have seen no improvements in our enforcement efforts and the morale of the Border Patrol agents is one of, if not the lowest in the entire federal government.”

Immigration agents have complained for several years that Mr. Obama has tied their hands, forcing them to release illegal immigrants who should have been easy deportation cases.

Customs and Border Protection, the agency that oversees the Border Patrol, declined to comment on Mr. Judd’s testimony.

But CBP Commissioner R. Gil Kerlikowske, testifying to Congress earlier this month, brushed aside Mr. Judd’s comments, saying he didn’t believe agents were releasing people without putting them through the full process.

Mr. Kerlikowske said Mr. Judd was “probably not the most knowledgeable organization about what’s actually going on” in the field with Border Patrol agents, and he said agents that object to Mr. Obama’s policies should quit.

The backog of immigration court cases is meaningless. Seventy-five percent of illegals fail to show up for their hearings anyway. And DHS has no way to keep track of those they release under this policy.

President Obama's policies have made it only more difficult to fix this broken system. Adding to the problem by increasing the number of illegals is irresponsible governance – which just about sums up the president's terms in office.

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY HAS LONG BEEN SABOTAGING STATES' ATTEMPT TO CURB LA RAZA FASCIST FROM VOTING.

MEXICO KNOWS THAT THE 40 MILLION LOOTING MEXICANS DON'T HAVE TO BE "PERMANENT RESIDENTS" TO GO VOTE FOR MORE!

Joel Diaz doesn’t want to wait to see how it all turns out. The Mexican-American, who has been a permanent resident of the U.S. for six years, arrived at the Mexican consulate in Chicago on Saturday with his wife and four adult sons to register all of them as U.S. citizens in order to vote against Trump.

"We’re very worried," Diaz, 47, an evangelical pastor, said. "If he wins there will be a lot of damage against a lot of people here, and to us as Hispanics, as Mexicans."

Laura Espinosa, deputy consul in Mexico’s consulate in Las Vegas, said the main goal of the program is citizenship, and while that includes the right to vote, the government doesn’t press people to do so. "Those who use this to vote, that’s up to each individual," said Espinosa, who confirmed that most consulates have begun citizenship campaigns. "We don’t have any opinion on that, because that would be totally interfering in internal affairs of the country."

The government in Mexico City is holding off on engaging the Trump campaign directly until he becomes the nominee, said Francisco Guzman, chief of staff to Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto. Speaking with reporters on March 1, Guzman said the government plans to communicate with the campaigns of the nominees once they’re chosen and try to dispel what it considers misinformation about Mexico and Mexicans.

The public-relations offensive now under way includes using news outlets and social media to highlight the strides Mexicans have made in business, the arts and academia in the U.S., said Paulo Carreno, the former spokesman of Citigroup Inc.’s Mexico unit who oversees the country’s international branding strategy.

Promoting Mexico in the U.S., from its scholars to artists, is meant "not to influence an election, but a whole generation and those that follow," Carreno said in an e-mailed response to questions. "The strategy will be an important anchor in our consular network in the country."

It should be noted that the chances of the Mexican government succeeding in getting enough of their people to become U.S. citizens so that they can make a difference in the 2016 election are low. But over a period of years, that could change – especially if the Republicans continue to refuse to compete for the Hispanic vote. Immigration issues are not the end-all and be-all for Hispanics in the U.S. They have the same concerns as any American about the economy and the culture.

Not even trying to persuade Hispanics that the GOP's agenda would be better for them than the Democrats will continue to make any national election and uphill climb for the Republican candidate.